LICENSING APPEAL.

Otago Witness, Issue 2950, 28 September 1910, Page 52

LICENSING APPEAL.

AN OAMARU CASE. The appeal of George A damson against the decision of Mr F. Hutchison, S.M., convicting him of receiving an order for liquor in the no-Keens'! district of Oamaru, came bofera His Honor Mr Justice Williams on Monday morning. Mr Lee repre- ; seated Adamson, and Mr J. F. M. Fraaer appeared for the Crown. | The point as to whether it had been i proved, or admitted, at the hearing in the I Folice Court that Oamaru was a no-iiceuso ! district had been argued a little while ago, j and the point had be-en decided in favour lof the Crown. In view of the fact, that a j very large number of affidavits had been ! filed allecriiiii- that the convicting mag is- • trate had made a mistake in assuming that | a written order had been given, further I inquiries were made. The case was now ! varied by a memorandum from tho magisI Irate to the effect that all reference to the i written order could be eliminated. j Mr Leo complained that he had now had j to attend the Supreme Court twice owing ! to the magistrate'-, method of stating the i case, and that it involved great hardship ■ upon his client, who was not a wealthy I man. Me (Mr Lee) tdleged that the prei sent situation was due solely to tho fact j that the convicting magistrate had taken I no notes of the case, and had declined to | look at the notes taken by his (Mr lice's i partner) or at the notes taken by the ; press, although the evidence of the sole ; witness occupied only three minutes. Hie Honor: What is your ground of appeal, Mr Lee? i /Mr Lee: That Adamson was not. guilty | on the facts of the cade; that what evidence there was did not disclose an offence. ! Mr Fraser Eaid that he recognised : the hardship entailed upon Mr Lee's client, I and he regretted it, but co far as he could i see the oniy course open was to remit the I case to the magistrate to be properly stated. No magistrate sitting on the I criminal side of the court could properly ; discharge his obligations to the public and to the Crown if he took no notes i " the evidence before him. Mr Lee eaid it seemed extraordinary, with such simple evidence, that they could not get the case properly stated. His Honor: You move practically for a non-suit, and say there was no case against ; Adamson? Mr Lee: Yes, your Honor. j His Honor: Ido not see how I can holp ; sending it hack If it goes against Mr Lee's client the Crown may take into .consideration the fact thai- 'there was no neglect by the accused. Mr Fraser: The accused has been brought here twice on a matter that should have , been disposed of on lis first application. His Honor said : The appeal in the pro- ■ romt case is based on the ground that, taking the evidence in the court below as uncontradicted, there was no breach of the , Licensing act. It is not a case of a oon--1 fliet of evidence, where, if there is a conflict of evidence, the magistrate's finding is lucid. Here, however, it is impossible ' to say whether the appeal is or is sot well- : grounded, unless one has not merely the conclusions of the magistrate but the actual evidence taken before him. I assume, of course, that the magistrate in a criminal case take-? proper ami sufficient notes of the evidence. If he did not' d<i so he fails in his duty. The case will go back to the magistrate for restatement, and in order to state the case proowlv he must set out I from hie notes the evidence that came : before him.